- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Chief's Harrison Butker delivers an unforgettable commencement address
Posted on 5/20/24 at 12:47 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Posted on 5/20/24 at 12:47 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Awful lot of critical analysis and interpreting being done on the guy’s behalf - seems like at the very least one could admit the message, whatever it was, was poorly delivered 
3
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:13 pm to NawlinsTiger9
quote:
Awful lot of critical analysis and interpreting being done on the guy’s behalf - seems like at the very least one could admit the message, whatever it was, was poorly delivered
Wrong, Again. You say this, but you also admitted, I think, to misinterpreting the word "disorder," and that it didn't really make sense until I explained it (while also saying it doesn't really change what you think, but I digress). Butker can't stand there and give you a rundown of the Catechism - that would take some time and probably still make no sense to people who don't want to listen.
The problem is that a bunch of people choose to react to something they have no idea about. And no amount of describing is really going to change the way they look at it. It is close to impossible to communicate about Spiritual things to people who don't want to hear it, don't believe and don't accept the definition of it. For you, I assume "not in alignment with God's will" is still gobbldigook, and for some reason you can't place yourself in the context of the speech and analyze it. You and DPB and the rest ONLY want your take on what he said, with misinterpretation, and nothing will change your mind, and since no definition will make sense, the core of what he said will never make sense. That's not Butker's fault, that's your immovable position (you want to talk about zealotry being "uncompromising, well there you go).
I mean, how am I supposed to convince you with words that life begins at conception, when you will never believe life begins at conception?
And that kind of wasn't a speech for someone who doesn't want to listen to it anyway. That was not his target audience. He probably knows there are better people for that purpose.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:18 pm to NawlinsTiger9
At least we got good memes from this whole situation
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:49 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
It is a fact beyond all coherent dispute that women who choose their career over having a family, or who disproportionately sacrifice time with their kids for their job, overwhelmingly regret it at some point in life.
But this is literally not a fact beyond coherent dispute. Some women do regret it. Some don't. There's a shite ton of women out there who regret being married, having kids, etc. There's a shite ton who regret not pursuing a career.
I'm not saying one way is automatically better. How about simply allowing women to choose for themselves what they would like to do with their lives, instead of trying to decide for them.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 1:51 pm
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:52 pm to QJenk
quote:
But this is literally not a fact beyond coherent dispute.
Every large study and survey on the topic reflects what I put in my post. There are NO such studies which support the alternative.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:53 pm to NawlinsTiger9
quote:
seems like at the very least one could admit the message, whatever it was, was poorly delivered
according to who?
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:55 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
There are NO such studies which support the alternative.
There's no studies that suggest many women don't regret being parents? You sure about that.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:55 pm to QJenk
quote:
There's a shite ton who regret not pursuing a career.
This is incorrect, the number of women who were homemakers who genuinely regret doing so on the basis of their preference for a career is exceedingly small, less than 15% of those surveyed.
But again nobody INCLUDING BUTKER said they can’t do both, or that they can’t choose to forgo marriage and kids altogether. He said that it’s a lie that most of them will be more fulfilled by their job than their family, which is true by all available evidence.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:55 pm to QJenk
I just wish people would follow the science.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:57 pm to Freauxzen
Nope nope nope
See this time I WAS talking about the thing you originally assumed I was - the controversial part.
You and I ran out of road on our discussion. You’re more upset with me calling butker a zealot than you are at him for talking like one. Fair enough, agree to disagree.
But if THIS
Is what Butker meant by his statement, as some of you suggest, yet THIS
Is what he said.
Then yeah, he did a poor job of communicating his message. It’s not the end of the damn world, but it is pretty obvious.
See this time I WAS talking about the thing you originally assumed I was - the controversial part.
You and I ran out of road on our discussion. You’re more upset with me calling butker a zealot than you are at him for talking like one. Fair enough, agree to disagree.
But if THIS
quote:
Hes basically saying don’t sacrifice a family at the alter of your career.
Is what Butker meant by his statement, as some of you suggest, yet THIS
quote:
"I think it is you, the women, who have had the most diabolic lies told to you," he said. "Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world."
Is what he said.
Then yeah, he did a poor job of communicating his message. It’s not the end of the damn world, but it is pretty obvious.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 1:58 pm to QJenk
quote:
There's no studies that suggest many women don't regret being parents?
There are no quality data sets that I am aware of which show a large number of women AS A PERCENTAGE of those who stay home with their kids who regret it and/or would have preferred to forgo that for a career. The largest number I’ve seen is 15-20% range. Compare that to over 90% of women in their late 40s and older who never had kids who regret it.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 2:01 pm to NawlinsTiger9
I guess I don’t understand how it’s possible to perceive his statement as being an either/or mutually exclusive proposition. Hes saying those who do go on to have successful careers WILL STILL get more fulfillment from their families. Thats statement by definition requires that subset of women to do both.
His attack was specifically on the idea that all women can be fulfilled with nothing but a job to define them while forgoing families, not that you can’t do both. And for the record the same is true for men.
His attack was specifically on the idea that all women can be fulfilled with nothing but a job to define them while forgoing families, not that you can’t do both. And for the record the same is true for men.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 5/20/24 at 2:07 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
less than 15% of those surveyed.
Perhaps we disagree on numbers. But 15% would still be a significant amount of people, imo. You can't make blanket statements that insinuate that all women will be better fulfilled by being mothers/wives. When there's 15% who feels totally opposite.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 2:11 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
His attack was specifically on the idea that all women can be fulfilled with nothing but a job to define them while forgoing families, not that you can’t do both. And for the record the same is true for men.
I mean, I don't disagree with you completely. Optimally, man or woman, your primary obligation should be towards your family. Career is second. Never put your career before your family's needs. Many will choose not to have a family, and that's ok. But those that do, should never neglect their family.
But that's not the message he was preaching, and if it was, he did a terrible job of getting that across.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 2:35 pm to QJenk
It's funny how the focus is on what he said to women/ mothers but nothing is said about what he said to men/fathers. That's how you know it's nothing but propaganda.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 3:29 pm to NawlinsTiger9
quote:
Is what Butker meant by his statement, as some of you suggest, yet THIS
quote:
quote:
"I think it is you, the women, who have had the most diabolic lies told to you," he said. "Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world."
Is what he said.
Then yeah, he did a poor job of communicating his message. It’s not the end of the damn world, but it is pretty obvious.
Because, as people have said, he was talking to a Catholic audience at a Catholic institution. There's a reason that Catholics are interpreting it as this:
quote:
Hes basically saying don’t sacrifice a family at the alter of your career.
That is literally what he said. He didn't say women shouldn't work. He didn't say women shouldn't work and have kids. And as some non-religious people in this very thread - what he said is true. Family SHOULD be the most important thing in your life. IAnd if you do it right, it probably will be.
So when I explain things to you, I'm doing so so you can understand the context, and understand that all he means is "Family first," but his context is from a Catholic perspective.
BUT as a catholic - Yes - It's true Evil things in this world - like trying to get mothers out of the home which is almost the entire point of modern feminism - is diabolical in Origin, because for me, the world is far more than just what we see. And their are forces, good and bad, at work in it.
Do you get it that if I didn't believe in the spiritual nature of the world that I wouldn't be Catholic?
It's like you think you should allow people to be religious, but not ACTUALLY believe in their beliefs. Like diabolical things don't ACTUALLY exist. It's all just made up. There's not actually a God. There's not actually a spiritual world. And that's why I think your use of the term zealotry in this instance is a huge problem. Because you view zealotry as just actual belief. Do you get that?
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 4:18 pm
Posted on 5/20/24 at 3:37 pm to NawlinsTiger9
quote:
You’re more upset with me calling butker a zealot than you are at him for talking like one.
quote:
Fair enough, agree to disagree.
You see what you're doing here? For him to respond to this, he has to accept your interpretation as fact.
That's something that cocksuckers do.
Don't be a cocksucker.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 4:29 pm to wadewilson
I'm not a Catholic, but I don't see how this is the least bit controversial given at a Catholic college. Unless most Catholics are Catholic in name only, like most Republicans.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 4:36 pm to bigDgator
quote:
I'm not a Catholic, but I don't see how this is the least bit controversial given at a Catholic college
It’s “controversial” for one reason and one reason only, because it’s a White male with an opinion that isn’t left leaning.
It wouldn’t matter if the opinion was far right or center right, in 2024 the media, entertainment industry, etc. wants to silence all White male opinions that aren’t left leaning. That is 100% all this is about.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 4:45 pm to ZIGG
quote:
It’s “controversial” for one reason and one reason only, because it’s a White male with an opinion that isn’t left leaning.
It wouldn’t matter if the opinion was far right or center right, in 2024 the media, entertainment industry, etc. wants to silence all White male opinions that aren’t left leaning. That is 100% all this is about.
I'm going to disagree a little and say this is more about anti-Christianity.
I enjoyed the debate with Nawlins, and he seemed to move a little bit, but his opinion is essentially "You can have religion, but don't really talk about it. Talking about your beliefs is zealotry. Pretty please. Don't tell anyone that something is diabolical, or that anything perceived as good could actually be morally or spiritually complex. That's dangerous. Just keep it to yourself."
It's the same frame of mind as the oft-misused separation of church and state, which most of the Left will interpret as "You can have your religion, but you can't really use it to defend/vote/promote political change." Which is a ludicrous position.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 4:46 pm
Page 28 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News